If there is no Objective Morality,How to hold responsibility?

36 posts / 0 new
Last post
Algebe's picture
@Drkfuture: How do you

@Drkfuture: How do you determine good or bad?

I think every human being and every human society have an innate evolved sense of what is right and wrong. The mechanism that most distorts that sense and is most frequently used to justify wickedness and cruelty is religion. Your conscience works much better if there's no god to forgive you or Jesus to offer vicarious redemption. Religion also blunts our desire for justice by reassuring us that all accounts will be settled in Cloud Cuckoo Land after we die.

So if you stop searching for your soul and god, and concentrate instead on your humanity, your inbuilt awareness of good and bad will come into much sharper focus.

Kataclismic's picture
Better question:

Better question:

If there IS objective morality how were women merciilessly killed for witchcraft in the seventeenth century?

Algebe's picture
@Kataclismic If there IS

@Kataclismic If there IS objective morality how were women merciilessly killed for witchcraft in the seventeenth century?

It wasn't objective morality but morality with an objective. That objective was to grab innocent women and strip them naked to search for the "devil's teat", to gratify sadistic tendencies by torturing them, and to steal their property in the name of Jesus.

I'd call it objectionable morality.

Dark One's picture
According to CS Lewis if

According to CS Lewis if these women were actually in league with a real Satanic dark power of evil then it would be objective moral to do away with them as they would be casting hexes and the like on everyone even from prison. It's only when people realised that the Satanic dark powers didn't really work (much like the Holy powers of God really) that they stopped.

JohnLFrazer's picture
I laugh when I hear

I laugh when I hear scriptural rules called objective morality. Next week, will it be objectively moral to take the kids to the town square to see some heretics and witches tortured and burned?
Supposedly objective religious rules are frightening because they're so fluid. Look at the many weaseling ways they have to get out of following all of their scriptural rules; "the New Covenant" or "ritual rules, not overall societal laws" and a double-dozen more ways to say they won't be taking slaves from neighboring nations, or beating slaves or stoning women who aren't virgins when they're married. They didn't stop burning witches because of a new revelation saying it's bad, but because objectively good ethical stances by secular laws made them stop, and the religious fought against it all the way and still are.
Morality is flexible, because mores are based on current society's rules.

Ethics is objective, and doesn't change.

How do we apply corrective action to stop someone from doing something bad? Gunfire usually works.
Was this supposed to be a hard question?


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.